Children of a Dead Earth

Children of a Dead Earth

Not enough ratings
Andersia-class
   
Award
Favorite
Favorited
Unfavorite
File Size
Posted
Updated
78.391 KB
18 Sep @ 7:31am
21 Sep @ 10:57am
3 Change Notes ( view )

Subscribe to download
Andersia-class

Description
Andersia-class

Made in disregard for things that are considered exploits or unrealistic, with the intention of being the most difficult AI controlled opponent possible, while minimizing lag.

It's the result of ~2 years of tinkering with the same vessel and 1600 hours. While i'm certain there's still much room for improvement, and while i'm sure i'll continue to tinker, it's in a very strong and complete state right now, ready to be shared with you guys.

Included are two different versions of the ship, one with a large laser, and one with a jitterproof laser. The latter is better at missile defense, but worse at long range engagements.

(Had issues uploading the mod regularly. Let me know if it's broken)
Lenght
247 m
Delta-v
9.52 km/s
(mod. 2, 9.71 km/s)
Mass
5.5 kt
Cost
63.7 Mc
Armament
791 km/s railgun
86.2 MW output laser, 2.66 GW intensity at 1 Mm
(mod. 2, 86.2 MW output laser, 9.22 MW intensity at 1 Mm)
Payload
144t drone
711x 271 kg 3 stage missile busses
600x 3.33 second pulse flares

Design

Survivability

1) Mobility
Armor is only as effective as the survivability and attritability of radiators and weapons. Since it is neither feasible nor desirable to armor these or field many of them, mobility is the better form of defense.
High mobility is achieved through the use of two independent rocket motor systems with seperate propellants. When the ship is at its heaviest, all motors fire simultaneously to provide strong acceleration. As fuel is consumed, acceleration naturally increases until one motor system will deplete its propellant. This ensures that acceleration remains good throughout the burn time, and G-load does not reach levels lethal to the crew. The crew compartment is also positioned close to the center of mass. This placement is necessary to keep the crew near the ship’s center of mass, which allows for greater maneuverability and agility, as it minimizes the risk of lethal G-loading.

2) Armor and Compartmentalization
Armor is kept minimal, so that it can only defeat single projectiles, for the reasons mentioned above. The armor is only good at resisting laser fire at extreme ranges and damage from close-proximity detonations of low-yield nuclear warheads.
Compartmentalization serves as the primary defense against direct hits from kinetic kill vehicles and missiles. The crew compartment is unfortunately positioned a little close to where the heat signature center is.

3) Countermeasures
Missiles can be engineered to become extreemely survivable, making heat management and countermeasures critical. The lower the ship’s heat signature, the more effectively it can carry and deploy flares in volume.
The cheapest and most effective countermeasure I've found, particularly when controlled by the AI, is pulse flares. When deployed within the irradiance cutoff of an incoming missile, pulse flares reset missile tracking each game tick. This has two outcomes:
- The missile can become “locked”, cycling between two flare sources.
- Statistically, the ship itself is excluded as a target through sorting. I think...

Lethality

1) Railguns
As railguns can be deadly, but dodged, they are best employed to force enemy ships to expend delta-v, as stationary opponents are easy targets. To maximize this threat, railguns should have both high muzzle velocity and high rate of fire. Concentrating all available power into a single railgun system is more effective than dividing energy among multiple weapon stations.

2) Lasers
Lasers are the most decisive systems in engagements because they cannot be evaded. Ship energy should be prioritized toward laser systems.
For anti-missile defense, there is some debate regarding whether multiple modules should be used to counter ablation-cap, or whether beams should be kept narrow or widened to offset jitter. Personally, I've observed that ablation-cap and jitter is not critical. Instead, laser effectiveness depends primarily on sheer power, particularly against missiles with long, narrow, and sharp profiles.
At steep angles, the laser’s effective contact area increases significantly, requiring greater energy to ablate. With a laser system that is min-maxxed to perfectly ablate a flat surface at a given distance, and has a spot large enough to avoid the jitterbug; these geometries reduce energy transfer and minimize ablation effects, regardless of material limits. Therefore, maximizing laser output and intensity is the most reliable strategy, in my opinion.

3) Missiles
Properly designed missiles can be made highly survivable by maximizing slenderness. Ratios around 20-30:1 in length to diameter are super effective.
Missile effectiveness can also be increased by maximizing delta-v, reducing the window in which they can be shot down. However, excessive velocity can be counterproductive: the faster the missile, the less time it has to make terminal course corrections.
I've opted to use flak warheads in these missiles, as they are much lighter and better at stripping away radiators. Missiles with nuclear handgrenades that detonate inside ships are, of course, also viable. Just easier to avoid, and larger.

4) Drones
Drones can be highly effective, though the AI is pretty bad at using them right.
The included drone is intended for player use. It's great at intercepting lower-priority targets where deploying the main ship isn't needed - such as in the mission “On the Surface of Giants” - or for intercepting incoming missiles preemptively, defeaing them before they intercept the warship.
15 Comments
diegohenrix 27 Sep @ 10:06am 
I thought that could be a bug, its really weird. Thanks for sharing your designs!
Anders Matthias  [author] 27 Sep @ 6:59am 
frankly i do not fully understand the bug yet, but these speeds are flat out not achievable using regular railguns. I have no clue how or why. I haven't done that much experimenting with optimal payload weight or dimensions, but i know it does affect performance. it's a relatively new area for me too, probably a lot of room for improvement.

Wearing it down is for sure the best strategy i've come up with too, since it can only carry so many decoys. If this game allowed "pvp" fights, that's where i imagine the onboard drone would assist, as it can intercept missiles before they intercept the actual ship.
Using a drone that carries a similar railgun also works, but that's probably only something a larger and costlier ship would carry.
diegohenrix 27 Sep @ 6:00am 
This became the new boss of the game for me. After a lot of fun in the designer i can't consistently beat it yet. Throwing a lot of expandable missile/drones to wear it off seems to be a strategy, another could be out ranging but that's a huge design challenge.

I am intrigued by your railgun, can you achieve these velocities only with payloads? Do you know why? I am trying to make a regular projectile one but it won't even get close in a similar footprint.
Anders Matthias  [author] 25 Sep @ 1:03pm 
no, that's a visual error - the armor doesn't actually physically cover the engine.
The bingo avoider is there to prevent the missiles from dying from being out of delta-v.
In aviation, being "bingo" means that you are almost out of fuel.
Kudaku 25 Sep @ 12:27pm 
Are the Bingo avoiders just for adding the armor layer over the missile engines or for somehting else?
MechDragon108 23 Sep @ 12:09pm 
This thing looks awesome
Anders Matthias  [author] 21 Sep @ 11:04am 
I updated the ship's missiles, they should be more survivable now. Also added a version of the ship that has a jitterproof laser in place of the massive one.
Anders Matthias  [author] 21 Sep @ 2:28am 
thank you so much for the thoughtful input, that's GOLD to me!
I'll see if i can improve on some of the areas mentioned. I hadn't tested this much against drone swarms, or the missiles against PDs. I'm not sure if the railgun drone issue can be remedied though, as they're just generally very strong against manned ships.
The MPDT is always a good idea, but i put it off in this case because i fear the AI would attempt to power it in combat instead of weapons. Not sure if that's actually the case.
ImpressiveMediocrity 20 Sep @ 7:31pm 
Overall, this is probably the single best designed ship I have ever seen for this game, and I'm going to be ripping off your railgun and missile tech as soon as I can get the freetime. I'm curious to see what you'll post in the future.

Edit: read these backwards, steam limits you to 1000 char comments lmao
ImpressiveMediocrity 20 Sep @ 7:31pm 
I'm not sure if you would consider it cheating, but adding an MPD thruster to use your reactor power with your existing fuel could significantly improve your strategic mobility. Here is a paper of someone using a hydrogen powered MPD so hydrocarbon systems are plausible, although I shudder to imagine the engineering challenges associated. You can generally get about 5mg out of such systems, useful for allowing you to return to where you want to be after burning hard for combat. https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/3.23691?journalCode=jpp .